MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7117313627 · doi:10.1002/alz70858_102189

Exploring equine therapy for people with dementia in long‐term care homes

2025· article· en· W7117313627 on OpenAlexaffabout
Marie‐Lee Yous, Megan Campbell, Brian Kim, Irene Hartigan, Christa Sedore, Jennifer Semach, Sathana Surendran, Amanda Tran, Jessie Xu, Sharon Kaasalainen

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicHuman-Animal Interaction Studies
Canadian institutionsMining Association of CanadaMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDementiaQuality of life (healthcare)Quality (philosophy)Social isolationMEDLINEPrimary careSocial care

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Equine(horse)-therapy or equine-assisted activities have been found to reduce stress, improve quality of life, and promote autonomy for people with dementia in long term care (LTC). In 2024, the [Walkabout Farm Therapeutic Riding Association Inc] in Ontario, Canada, recently launched a new program called R.E.A.P. (Recreational Equine Assisted Participaction). This program provides older adults in LTC homes full sensory engagement through interactions with horses, including petting, grooming, walking and feeding. Sessions, led by trained facilitators, last approximately 45 minutes and are hosted indoors at LTC homes, or on-site at Walkabout Farm. To date, no evaluation of equine-assisted activities for people with dementia living in LTC exists in Canada. The purpose of this study is to explore the feasibility, acceptability, and observed effects R.E.A.P. in LTC. METHOD: The research design consists of qualitative description with quantitative data collected in terms of feasibility (i.e., number of sessions provided per resident per week, length of sessions) and observed effects (i.e., engagement with the horses/stimuli; interactions between residents, caregivers, and staff). Research staff collected feasibility and observation data during the R.E.A.P. sessions. Data collection occurred in person either at the Walkabout Farm or at the LTC home. Interviews with residents and staff occurred in person, by phone or by videoconferencing (i.e., Zoom). Descriptive statistics were used for quantitative statistics and direct content analysis for the interview data. RESULT: A total of 12 participants completed the study including 3 staff members and 9 residents. None of the participants refused to participate in the sessions. Out of the 34 sessions delivered, residents were very attentive to attentive towards the horses (79%) and talked with the horses during the sessions (88%). Findings from the interviews revealed that sessions helped to foster relationships between residents, the horses, and staff, created emotional connection for residents, elicited enjoyment, and promoted reminiscing. CONCLUSION: The R.E.A.P. program demonstrated meaningful benefits to residents in LTC, including enhanced emotional well-being, social engagement and quality of life. These findings highlight the potential of equine therapy in enriching and supporting the well-being of residents in LTC.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.046
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.294 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & DementiaSame topicHuman-Animal Interaction StudiesFrench-language works237,207